MTBF is useful information, but I think it would be more useful in conjunction with factors like active spinning time, total spin up/down counts, cumulative head seek time, total IO, etc. Presumably time-in-service affects the MTBF more than the age of the drive, but to what extent? Is a NIB drive that's two years old going to be as reliable as one that's only a month or two old? So many variables....

The internet is really the best medium for sarcasm.

Pretty sure this opens him up to a legal malpractice suit. Probably more lucrative than whatever the debt was.

lasting ecological shifts will hinge on design and long-term care.

We don't really know that for sure. It may improve the odds, but neither desertification nor greening require human intervention, nor is human intervention necessarily going to achieve the desired outcome. Life, uh... finds a way. (Except when it doesn't.) But for all we know (and what seems most likely absent evidence to the contrary), this is just a temporary oasis of sorts that will last only as long as the structures on the site.

The article is sparse on details. I don't necessarily think driverless cars should be given a free pass -- in fact, we should probably have higher fines for the manufacturers -- but 9 times out of 10 when a road is blocked, it's because of construction or an accident, not a checkpoint. I suspect it was reacting to the obstruction, because when a road is obstructed, the "no U-Turn" rule generally doesn't apply (or isn't enforced anyway). In fact, if it hadn't been a checkpoint, I doubt they would have even been looking for illegal U-Turns, which are indicative of people trying to avoid the checkpoint, presumably.

As for fines, I do think they should be higher for self-driving cars, because $300 isn't even a slap on the wrist for Google. On the other hand, that could create a perverse incentive where officers are ignoring flagrant violations by human drivers in favor of issuing a $100k ticket to a Waymo that veered out of its lane to avoid a hazard. It could also create a situation where self-driving cars are so cautious that traffic is snarled by puritanical robot cars that won't even approach the speed limit because it's not worth the risk.

Sorry for your loss. Dating apps are indeed garbage. If I were single, I'd be talking to every attractive person I saw at a grocery store, museum, out walking, etc. I'm an introvert and it makes me nervous AF, but I've also realized that pretty much anyone who agrees to meet for a drink is already interested, so that makes it easier. I mean I hate doing job interviews too, but it's just part of the process, not the end of the world.

"Why? Why should sports be segregated by gender at all? Where's the science for that?"

No by gender, Yes by sex. We say women sport men sport because colloquially everybody until recently (a few decades ago) use women/men for male/female - but the reality is we split sport by sex which we use the colloquial gender name for, but make no mistake the separation is for sex (you can get into a lot of issues of somebody appearing one sex but having hormone insensitivity that does not change the reason for separation which is sexual dimorphism in human). There is a biological reality which is undeniable. Men have roughly 75% more to double the the upper body strength than women and about 25% more lower body strength than women. There are plenty of science article e.g. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a... is an example of those. You can google "difference between men and women strength" and imit yourself to nih.gov and get plenty of hit. Some study are even from other countries e.g. google (out of memory) "proxy grip strength by age and sex" which is a study on grip stgrength as proxy of difference between male , female and age - where you can see non-sport women have about half the strength of non-sport men.

So unless your sport involve ZERO upper and lower body strength, it makes sense to separate sports by sex - note that I don't say gender again. In fact you can find more article on how men resist pain more than women. Another reason to separate sport. If you don't then you eliminate any chance any women to ever be in the top for sport.

And that advantage does not disappear fully with hormone therapy. Skeletal structure & muscle mass is influenced heavily by puberty, muscle mass does not disappear fully with hormone therapy either.

Don't announce you have the way to bypass it but can't publish. 1) dont tell anyone
2) make a patch executable which change the functrion in your app or allow to compile the app with restored function.
3) go through your code and "change" the coding style.
4) take your comments in code, then translate the comment in russian, then translate russian in chinese, then chinese back in english : this is your new comment
5) tkae your function names and translate in russian
6) go into a coffee with free wifi in a separate city, buy a burner, use vpn, tor it, connect to wifi, push the code to a torrent or somewhere where it will attract attention

Now the code is out in the wild, and people can use your app, and chance is nobody will ever be able to trace it back to you.

Everything is derivative (or just plain copying), though generative doesn't even imply novelty. I can generate a list of the first X positive integers and that will still be generative as long as I didn't specify each one literally. It will not be novel.

I mean, the same is true of many things that are automated. Every once in a while someone dies on an escalator, but far fewer people die from riding an escalator than by falling down stairs.

I'm curious what specific problems have been "solved" by particular generative AI startups. I'm aware of AI-based tools for specific tasks, but nothing that uses LLMs to solve a problem (other than perhaps code generation).

I assume you mean because water evaporates more quickly than pads are wetted, leading to reduced functionality. This is an implementation problem, not a limitation of the concept itself. Better wetting, materials, and/or using multi-stage evaporative coolers can overcome the limit of older systems typically found in homes.

This is assuming rational behavior, which is a stretch here.

It's easy to get great efficiency when you're traveling at 25MPH, where drag is a minimal contributor. Most modern EVs can manage close to 5 mi/kWh at those speeds. Range is then just a question of battery capacity, so is the improvement in energy density, or just packing more batteries into the vehicle?

There is a fundamental difference between traveling a thousand kms, over the surface of a planet and expecting *soil* to be on the place where you land, and traveling among stars and finding useless non-life compatible rocks. A better analogy would have been those islander traveling... And finding zero soil on the new island.